FlightGear planes don't really burn or break up after a crash

According to the Wikipedia article, starting fires when planes crash is a new feature of 2.0.0

Retaining the DNA of innocent people and using stop and search powers without reasonable suspicion are two areas that come to mind, the UK government has been successfully prosecuted in the ECHR but has yet to comply with the rulings

For example, if living in an apartment building I *feel* my chances of getting robbed are higher on the ground floor. I'm sure statistics prove me wrong but that's how I feel.

No, statistics would prove you right, which is why ground floor apartments have higher insurance costs. Considering the majority of burgalries are opportunistic, it's no great surprise.

As an added bonus, information regarding Paul's mortality can be found by playing the record in the opposite direction.

Or at least it would have been if EMI had released the rights. Guess aliens aren't immune from the RIAA either, couldn't have them listening to music without paying for it!

Yeah, but good luck finding a mobile data package with a decent data usage limit. In the UK at least the limits are stupidly low, even on the packages advertised as 'unlimited'. In some cases the 'unlimited' packages can have limits of 500MB/month and charge per the MB above that - and they get away with it because they told the Advertising Standards Authority that 500MB was more than any 'reasonable' person would use in a month.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't agree with censorship at all. I just think there are ways the authorities can do it and be less suspicious in their motives. But yeah, slippery slope and all that

Where possible, inform the site owners of the reason the site is being blocked, and give them a right of appeal. Also, tell people they are visiting a blocked site and give them information on why it was blocked and what to do if they think it was blocked in error. That'd still allow sites to be 'legitimately' blocked where they violate the law, but hopefully prevent chilling effects of restricting free speech.

Do I get the points?

Well, it certainly meets the definition of 'terrorism' in the UK, as defined by the Terrorism Act 2000. "'terrorism' means the use or threat of action where... the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause. Action falls within this subsection if it... is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system"

Reported for this. People have actually been convicted in the UK for downloading that

Well actually, they've already done that in the UK, if a trial is too complicated and will go on for too long, the judge can hold the trial without a jury and just decide on the verdict himself. It's under Section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Section 44 allows for trials without jury where the police can't afford to protect the jury from tampering/intimidation.

You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights. And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.

But I assume they use analogue radio transmissions for that, not data

If you're going to quote me, at least quote me all instead of selectively quoting. I said the majority of the CN Tower does not have usable floor space. That is, it doesn't have the 50% required to be recognised as a building by the CTBUH. It's basically just a big lift shaft with a few floors on the top.

Except that the majority of the CN Tower does not have usable floor space, and therefore is not comparable to other skyscrapers. The general authority on these matters is the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and they do not consider the CN Tower to be a building.

By your logic, the Warsaw Radio Mast, built in 1974 was taller than the CN Tower.

No it isn't. It's just contradiction.